MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174016247 · doi:10.11124/jbies-20-00394

Food security in African Canadian communities: a scoping review

2021· review· en· W3174016247 on OpenAlexaffabout
Keisha Jefferies, Tiffany Richards, Nicole Blinn, Meaghan Sim, Sara Kirk, Gurneet Dhami, Melissa Helwig, Damilola Iduye, Elaine Moody, Marilyn Macdonald, Gail Tomblin Murphy, Ruth Martin‐Misener

Bibliographic record

VenueJBI Evidence Synthesis · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)Nova Scotia Health AuthorityCapital District Health AuthorityMount Saint Vincent UniversityUniversity of TorontoDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood securityEnvironmental planningGeographyPolitical scienceEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceAgricultureArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to chart the evidence relating to food security among African Canadian communities to inform future research and offer insight related to food security in African Canadian communities. INTRODUCTION: Achieving food security is of global importance to meet the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. As a social determinant of health, food security, which refers to the unrestricted physical, economic, and timely access to safe and nutritious foods, impacts more than 4 million Canadians. Yet, little is known about food security and the differential impacts of food insecurity among African Canadians. This scoping review sought to describe the current state of food security among African Canadians. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Sources were considered for inclusion if they: i) focused on Canada, ii) involved African Canadians, and iii) examined food security. METHODS: This scoping review was conducted in accordance with JBI methodology. Databases and relevant websites containing peer-reviewed, unpublished, and gray literature were searched. Ancestry searching and forward citation tracing were completed. No restrictions were placed on date of publication. Language restrictions were limited to English and French. In instances where articles were unavailable, authors of potential sources were contacted at the full-text review phase to request access to their article. Data were extracted independently by two team members, and are presented narratively and in tabular format. RESULTS: The search of databases yielded a total of 1183 records. Ancestry tracing yielded 287 records. After removing duplicates, 1075 titles and abstracts were screened for eligibility and 80 advanced to full-text screening. Seventy-five full-text articles were excluded for not meeting the inclusion criteria, leaving five articles that underwent data extraction. All five included studies involved African Canadian participants in Canada. All studies focused on adults; one study included women and men participants, while four focused exclusively on women. One study involving women participants included cisgender and transgender women as well as those identifying as queer. Study designs reflected qualitative (n = 2), quantitative (n = 1), and mixed methods (n = 2) designs. CONCLUSIONS: This review begins to fill a gap in understanding the current evidence available on food security as it impacts African Canadians. The findings of this review represent existing research, describing the type of evidence available and methodologies used, before suggesting implications for research and practice. The inclusion of only five studies reveals the limited evidence regarding the current state of food security among African Canadians. Further, included studies were exclusively conducted in urban settings and predominantly in one province. There is a need for further research in rural communities, in other provinces and territories, as well as with younger and older participants. The urgent need to collect race-disaggregated data in Canada is evident.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.303
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJBI Evidence SynthesisSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207